beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows, and the part concerning the defendant’s reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is identical to that of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it shall be cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Comprehensively taking into account the facts as seen earlier, such as the occupation, financial status, process of concluding multiple insurance contracts, scale of insurance contracts, hospitalization period after concluding the insurance contract, hospitalization period, and the amount of insurance proceeds paid, the instant insurance contract is null and void against good morals and other social order. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff 30,880,000 won in total of the insurance proceeds paid under the instant insurance contract and the amount of the insurance proceeds paid to the Plaintiff as requested by the Plaintiff (based on Article 748(2) of the Civil Act in light of the relationship between the Defendant and the policyholder) from September 18, 2013 to October 15, 2013, on the record that the date of payment of the final insurance proceeds (based on the relationship between the Defendant and the policyholder) is 5% per annum as prescribed by the Civil Act and the following day from October 16, 2013 to September 30, 2015.
- Article 3 (2) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings provides that "if an obligor deems it appropriate to dispute over the existence or scope of the obligation, the existence or scope of the obligation is deemed reasonable, the argument of the obligor in dispute over the existence or scope of the obligation is deemed considerably reasonable (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 90Da9285, Jan. 25, 1991). In this case, the defendant's assertion cannot be found to have considerable grounds.
In addition, according to Article 2 (2) of the Addenda to the provision on statutory interest rate under the main sentence of Article 3 (1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Law (Presidential Decree No. 26553), the above provision is applicable